Innovation Performance on Digital Versatile Disc (DVD) 3C Patent Pool Formation

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 253)

Abstract

Theoretical suggestions are inconsistent with empirical findings about whether patent pools encourage innovation domain. This paper empirically examines the firm-level innovation on patent pool formation. In order to empirically investigate the variance of the innovation performance of patent pool, this paper proposes hypothesis for post-formation innovation performance in comparison to pre-formation one in the DVD (Digital Versatile or Digital Video Discs) 3C pool members. This paper employs well-used patent quality indicator- forward citation count as patent quality measurement. To further test the hypothesis, this paper will apply one-sample t-test to conclude whether the mean of the post-formation forward citation count significantly declines comparing with the pre-formation one. Based on the result, this paper aims to verify whether patent pools formation slow down patent innovation performance from firm-level perspective and contribute to the growing literature on the effect of institutional innovations on the follow-on innovation.

Keywords

Innovation Patent pool DVD 3C Patent quality Forward citation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author thanks the National Science Council of Taiwan for supporting this research under the grant of NSC 101-2221-E-027 -080 -. The author also thanks Pei–Chi Chang’s (master student at National Taipei University of Technology) efforts in generating data.

References

  1. 1.
    Federal Trade Commission (2003) To promote innovation: the proper balance of competition and patent law and policy.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clarkson G, Dekorte D (2006) The problem of patent thickets in convergent technologies. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1093:180–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shapiro C. (2001) Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools, and standard-setting. In: Jaffe A, Lerner J, Stern S (eds) Innovation policy and the economy, vol. 1, p 119–150 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Teece D, Sherry E (2003) Standards setting and antitrust. Minnesota Law Rev 87:1913–1994Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hall BH, Ziedonis RH (2001) The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the U.S. semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. Rand J Econ 32(1):101–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Joshi M, Nerkar A (2011) When do strategic alliances inhibit innovation by firms? Evidence from patent pools in the global optical disc industry. Strat Mgmt J 32:1139–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vakili K (2012) Competitive effects of modern patent pools: the effect of the MPEG-2 Pool on incumbents? Inovative performance Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farrell J, Katz ML (2000) Innovation, rent extraction, and integration in systems markets. Economics Working Papers E00-286, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lampe RL, Moser P (2010) Patent pools and the direction of innovation: evidence from the 19th-century sewing machine industry. NBER Working Papers 17573, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    Serafino D (2007) Survey of patent pools demonstrates variety of purposes and management structures, Knowledge Ecology Int’lGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trappey JC, Wang YH, Lin TH, Peng HY (2012) Empirical analysis of patent cross-licensing for light-emitting diode industry. 21th International association for management of technology, Hsinchu, Taiwan, March, pp 18–22Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ma TC (2010) Competition authority independence, antitrust effectiveness, and institutions. Rev Law Econ 30(3):226–235Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Taipei University of TechnologyTaipei CityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations